How to electrocute Blacks, 1983.
Much better than the book, which contains 2 chapters on the invention of the electric chair and its introduction into american prisons.
Fight club
A lot of Stephen King books suck and the adaptations are way better. Most Korean TV shows improved their horrific source material (often webtoons, not books, but still)
I disagree. Each movie needed 1 hour more. Which parts of the books? The constant singing of course. Oh and the 100 pages describing how Hobbits grow stuff in the first book is dearly missed in the movies. And how saruman destroys everything after sauron is defeated.
I thought the LOTR movies were fun but hated the books. The writing was dry as the desert. I got 100 pages into FOTR and gave up.
Stephen King sucks but the Shining movie is good
>Dunc >Blade Runner >Jurassic Park >LotR trilogy >The Shining >A Clockwork Orange >American Psycho >No Country for Old Men >Silence of the Lambs >Watchmen >Ichi the Killer
I have no idea why. When I was a kid I read every Steven King book he’d written to that point and why in hell he didn’t like the Kubrick Shining I will never know. I think his main gripe was that they totally changed the ending but every change Kubrick made was for the better. The Shining is really not one of his best books anyway.
Unironically I like the 90s Mario Bros movie, it and hackers have this great corny yet oddly sincere cyberpunk aesthetic and ambiance that's just great. Also it seemed like everyone was having a good time hamming it up.
I read this a year or two ago. Aside from the reinstatement of deleted scenes like the restaurant one and more character stuff I remember they also made Koopa a lot more evil.
Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas. The book was good but the movie did a better job of recreating the atmosphere of a drug induced stupor than letters on paper ever could.
The book is this weird Simpsons-esque fever dream written in broken southern-accented english with shit like Gump, an old lady, and a monkey getting sent off to space, their rocket crash landing on an island full of cannibals, and the reason they don't get eaten is because Forrest spent every night for four years playing chess against the chief because the chief wanted to beat him in chess before he ate him and his friends. Later, when the chief finally wins, another tribe shows up and kidnaps Gump and his friends, but they escape because Forrest convinces them that him and his friends are a band that "plays the knives and spears" causing the tribe to provide them with weapons, which they use to defeat them. Also, the old lady decides to stay because she fell in love with one of the locals.
There's more weird shit in there but that's the peak of it. The writer even did a sequel where Jenny comes back as a ghost and the actual movie is made in-universe with Forrest disliking it.
As you can tell it's very obvious the film is more well known that book. Decent short read imo.
Easy one for me; The 9th Gate. It's based on the book "The Club Dumas" and while they both share the premise of globe trotting investigating The Nine Gates to the Kingdom of Shadows, the book ultimately shows there is nothing supernatural or any satanic cults or conspiracies. Just old rich people having a giant get together over their love of Alexander Dumas.
In contrast the movie only gets more crazy over the top as it goes along. And quote frankly I much preferred it that way. Also there's just something comfy about the movie for me, one of my favorite Johnny Depp roles, before all of his performances were a variation of Jack Sparrow.
Hmm, I actually consider "All You Need is Kill" and Edge of Tomorrow to be equal in quality. The major change obviously is the ending. I felt like the book ending thematically was better, although obviously I doubt the Hollywood version would have ever had the balls to conclude with Rita and Cruises character battling each other to the death (in the book, both of them are trapped in each other's loops, if both lived, ultimately everything would have been reset, so only one could live.)
starship troopers is neck on neck, both are HIGHLY chudly
jurassic park
there's another one that's really obvious but i forget
The book has Dr Malcolm’s chudrant on global consumer non-culture thoughever
oh right it was lord of the rings
Oh wait. I meant rings of power and the hobbit trilogy. My bad. Way better than the books
you didn't use the right capitalization but i'll agree with this for shitposting reasons
JP movie is better
ST movie isn’t remotely based on the book. dunno how anyone could read it and reach the opposite conclusion
How to electrocute Blacks, 1983.
Much better than the book, which contains 2 chapters on the invention of the electric chair and its introduction into american prisons.
Holes is one I seem to remember.
Fight club
A lot of Stephen King books suck and the adaptations are way better. Most Korean TV shows improved their horrific source material (often webtoons, not books, but still)
Fight Club might as well be a t-ball answer.
Palahniuk hasn't written a single good book, and he only got close with this one.
The Shining
The Shining
High Fidelity
Thin Red Line
Logan’s Run
Pretty much any movie based on a Stephen King novel.
even The Langoliers?
Annihilation film has better than the book, even with the extreme cuckoldry
>even with the extreme cuckoldry
How bad is the book?
Literally any movie, books suck. I guess I’d rather read a book than watch NuWars or something, but.
Some kino books were adapted by moronic Black folk, like Ender's Game
Some kino books just haven't had film adaptations yet, like the Turner Diaries
Genocidal Organ.
The Long Goodbye
>but Marlowe isn’t supposed to kill people
Don’t care, movie was still better.
The Postman had a cyborg super soldier sub plot that seemed really out of place. The movie had some problems, but was fun. Also Tom Petty.
The Shining.
The novelization of a movie is sometimes better like the Dark knight rises or Once upon a time in hollywood. Making complete trash somewhat decent
In A Lonely Place. Probably a bunch of other 50s noir as every other movie was based off a book back then, but that’s the only one I’ve read.
LOTR trilogy
Prove me wrong. Protip: you can't
>b...but muh Tom Bombadil!
He's a meme character and Peter Chadson did good on getting rid of him
I disagree. Each movie needed 1 hour more. Which parts of the books? The constant singing of course. Oh and the 100 pages describing how Hobbits grow stuff in the first book is dearly missed in the movies. And how saruman destroys everything after sauron is defeated.
I thought the LOTR movies were fun but hated the books. The writing was dry as the desert. I got 100 pages into FOTR and gave up.
Stephen King sucks but the Shining movie is good
If you weren't elated by Tolkien's descriptions of firework you are an illiterate pleb.
I'd rather be a pleb than die of boredom
I remember trying to read Lord of the rings in elementary school and thinking it was boring as frick
American Psycho
>Dunc
>Blade Runner
>Jurassic Park
>LotR trilogy
>The Shining
>A Clockwork Orange
>American Psycho
>No Country for Old Men
>Silence of the Lambs
>Watchmen
>Ichi the Killer
was that supposed to be a challenge or something
>this moron thinks watchmen is based on a book
Nah, he's right, don't get me wrong I liked the graphic novel too, but I preferred the movies ending
The Shining is the most obvious one. Not a bad book if you like King, but more pulp than art. Somehow Kubrick was able to elevate that.
Why does he hate the movie so much again? Ive never read the book
Jack Nicholson? It's because he wanted to frick as many kids as he could back then and acting in a movie stopped him from doing that.
nah, I meant Stephen King
I think he's crying all the way to the bank, because he sold another million of his books lädt week
I have no idea why. When I was a kid I read every Steven King book he’d written to that point and why in hell he didn’t like the Kubrick Shining I will never know. I think his main gripe was that they totally changed the ending but every change Kubrick made was for the better. The Shining is really not one of his best books anyway.
Inherent Vice
>novelization utterly mogs the film
Any other cases of this?
Alien 3 as well
Unironically I like the 90s Mario Bros movie, it and hackers have this great corny yet oddly sincere cyberpunk aesthetic and ambiance that's just great. Also it seemed like everyone was having a good time hamming it up.
I read this a year or two ago. Aside from the reinstatement of deleted scenes like the restaurant one and more character stuff I remember they also made Koopa a lot more evil.
No one said Jaws yet? Or The Godfather?
Jumper
Limitless
From the very top of my head:
Dead Calm (1989)
Starship Troopers
The House of the Spirits
Saawariya
The Handmaiden
And of course, this fricking movie, which took the most banal and bland book and turned it into a half-decent flick to watch
Blade Runner
Fight Club
There Will Be Blood
Drive
True Grit
homie is this a real question? I can keep going if you want
The Road
I think the book is better, more brutal than the movie. It's hard to translate the despair of Mccarthy's writing onto film
Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas. The book was good but the movie did a better job of recreating the atmosphere of a drug induced stupor than letters on paper ever could.
Not a movie but You is way better
Secret of NIMH
neverending story
American psycho
Forrest Gump
The book is this weird Simpsons-esque fever dream written in broken southern-accented english with shit like Gump, an old lady, and a monkey getting sent off to space, their rocket crash landing on an island full of cannibals, and the reason they don't get eaten is because Forrest spent every night for four years playing chess against the chief because the chief wanted to beat him in chess before he ate him and his friends. Later, when the chief finally wins, another tribe shows up and kidnaps Gump and his friends, but they escape because Forrest convinces them that him and his friends are a band that "plays the knives and spears" causing the tribe to provide them with weapons, which they use to defeat them. Also, the old lady decides to stay because she fell in love with one of the locals.
There's more weird shit in there but that's the peak of it. The writer even did a sequel where Jenny comes back as a ghost and the actual movie is made in-universe with Forrest disliking it.
As you can tell it's very obvious the film is more well known that book. Decent short read imo.
Easy one for me; The 9th Gate. It's based on the book "The Club Dumas" and while they both share the premise of globe trotting investigating The Nine Gates to the Kingdom of Shadows, the book ultimately shows there is nothing supernatural or any satanic cults or conspiracies. Just old rich people having a giant get together over their love of Alexander Dumas.
In contrast the movie only gets more crazy over the top as it goes along. And quote frankly I much preferred it that way. Also there's just something comfy about the movie for me, one of my favorite Johnny Depp roles, before all of his performances were a variation of Jack Sparrow.
The Hills have eyes is about white colonizers versus black inbred lesbian cannibals
Jaws
The prose in the book is very clumsy, also weird piss fetish shit.
Edge of Tomorrow
Hmm, I actually consider "All You Need is Kill" and Edge of Tomorrow to be equal in quality. The major change obviously is the ending. I felt like the book ending thematically was better, although obviously I doubt the Hollywood version would have ever had the balls to conclude with Rita and Cruises character battling each other to the death (in the book, both of them are trapped in each other's loops, if both lived, ultimately everything would have been reset, so only one could live.)
Know how i can tell you don't actually read books?
>off of